Open Problems. Problem 2. Assume PD. C 3 is the largest countable Π 1 3-set of reals. Is it true that C 3 = {x M 2 R x is. Known:

Similar documents
The Outer Model Programme

LARGE CARDINALS AND L-LIKE UNIVERSES

Covering properties of derived models

Determinacy models and good scales at singular cardinals

A relative of the approachability ideal, diamond and non-saturation

Sy D. Friedman. August 28, 2001

ON THE SINGULAR CARDINALS. A combinatorial principle of great importance in set theory is the Global principle of Jensen [6]:

Philipp Moritz Lücke

being saturated Lemma 0.2 Suppose V = L[E]. Every Woodin cardinal is Woodin with.

PARTITIONS OF 2 ω AND COMPLETELY ULTRAMETRIZABLE SPACES

Set- theore(c methods in model theory

Tall, Strong, and Strongly Compact Cardinals

Chain conditions, layered partial orders and weak compactness

Bounds on coloring numbers

The Semi-Weak Square Principle

Level by Level Inequivalence, Strong Compactness, and GCH

Characterizing large cardinals in terms of layered partial orders

The (λ, κ)-fn and the order theory of bases in boolean algebras

DEPTH OF BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS SHIMON GARTI AND SAHARON SHELAH

A precipitous club guessing ideal on ω 1

SUCCESSIVE FAILURES OF APPROACHABILITY

STRONGLY UNFOLDABLE CARDINALS MADE INDESTRUCTIBLE

COLLAPSING SUCCESSORS OF SINGULARS

Chapter 4. Cardinal Arithmetic.

UPWARD STABILITY TRANSFER FOR TAME ABSTRACT ELEMENTARY CLASSES

Hod up to AD R + Θ is measurable

INDESTRUCTIBLE STRONG UNFOLDABILITY

MITCHELL S THEOREM REVISITED. Contents

The Resurrection Axioms

Continuous images of closed sets in generalized Baire spaces ESI Workshop: Forcing and Large Cardinals

Notes to The Resurrection Axioms

DIAGONAL PRIKRY EXTENSIONS

Generalising the weak compactness of ω

Strongly Unfoldable Cardinals Made Indestructible

CONSECUTIVE SINGULAR CARDINALS AND THE CONTINUUM FUNCTION

Annals of Pure and Applied Logic

Chromatic number of infinite graphs

Notes on getting presaturation from collapsing a Woodin cardinal

Mathematisches Forschungsinstitut Oberwolfach. Mini-Workshop: Feinstrukturtheorie und Innere Modelle

On Singular Stationarity I (mutual stationarity and ideal-based methods)

Extender based forcings, fresh sets and Aronszajn trees

LOCAL CLUB CONDENSATION AND L-LIKENESS

Attempt QUESTIONS 1 and 2, and THREE other questions. Do not turn over until you are told to do so by the Invigilator.

Large cardinals and their effect on the continuum function on regular cardinals

ADDING A LOT OF COHEN REALS BY ADDING A FEW II. 1. Introduction

Generalization by Collapse

Axiomatization of generic extensions by homogeneous partial orderings

Combinatorics, Cardinal Characteristics of the Continuum, and the Colouring Calculus

ARONSZAJN TREES AND THE SUCCESSORS OF A SINGULAR CARDINAL. 1. Introduction

COMBINATORICS OF REDUCTIONS BETWEEN EQUIVALENCE RELATIONS

arxiv: v2 [math.lo] 26 Feb 2014

On the strengths and weaknesses of weak squares

The tree property for supercompactness

January 28, 2013 EASTON S THEOREM FOR RAMSEY AND STRONGLY RAMSEY CARDINALS

Global singularization and the failure of SCH

Large Cardinals with Few Measures

Satisfaction in outer models

GUESSING MODELS IMPLY THE SINGULAR CARDINAL HYPOTHESIS arxiv: v1 [math.lo] 25 Mar 2019

Generic embeddings associated to an indestructibly weakly compact cardinal

The first author was supported by FWF Project P23316-N13.

On almost precipitous ideals.

THE NUMBER OF UNARY CLONES CONTAINING THE PERMUTATIONS ON AN INFINITE SET

COMBINATORICS AT ℵ ω

A HIERARCHY OF RAMSEY-LIKE CARDINALS

Strongly compact Magidor forcing.

Short Extenders Forcings II

SHIMON GARTI AND SAHARON SHELAH

Two Stationary Sets with Different Gaps of the Power Function

CARDINALITIES OF RESIDUE FIELDS OF NOETHERIAN INTEGRAL DOMAINS

Closed Maximality Principles: Implications, Separations and Combinations

NORMAL MEASURES ON A TALL CARDINAL. 1. Introduction We start by recalling the definitions of some large cardinal properties.

arxiv: v3 [math.lo] 23 Jul 2018

Silver type theorems for collapses.

Reflection Principles &

arxiv:math/ v1 [math.lo] 15 Jan 1991

PERFECT TREE FORCINGS FOR SINGULAR CARDINALS

On the Splitting Number at Regular Cardinals

Large cardinals and the Continuum Hypothesis

THE TREE PROPERTY UP TO ℵ ω+1

Hierarchies of (virtual) resurrection axioms

Währinger Strasse 25, 1090 Vienna Austria

FORCING AND THE HALPERN-LÄUCHLI THEOREM. 1. Introduction This document is a continuation of [1]. It is intended to be part of a larger paper.

On Singular Stationarity II (tight stationarity and extenders-based methods)

An effective perfect-set theorem

AN INFINITE CARDINAL-VALUED KRULL DIMENSION FOR RINGS

MODIFIED EXTENDER BASED FORCING

Interpolation of κ-compactness and PCF

Cardinal arithmetic: The Silver and Galvin-Hajnal Theorems

Stacking mice. Ernest Schimmerling 1 Department of Mathematical Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA

ALL LARGE-CARDINAL AXIOMS NOT KNOWN TO BE INCONSISTENT WITH ZFC ARE JUSTIFIED arxiv: v3 [math.lo] 30 Dec 2017

2. The ultrapower construction

arxiv:math/ v1 [math.lo] 9 Dec 2006

Easton s theorem and large cardinals from the optimal hypothesis

SOME CONSEQUENCES OF REFLECTION ON THE APPROACHABILITY IDEAL

Math 280B Winter Recursion on Well-Founded Relations. 6.1 Recall: For a binary relation R (may be a proper class): T 0 = A T n+1 = pred R (a)

6. Recursion on Well-Founded Relations

arxiv: v2 [math.lo] 13 Feb 2014

SHORT EXTENDER FORCING

Fat subsets of P kappa (lambda)

Preservation theorems for Namba forcing

Transcription:

Open Problems Problem 1. Determine the consistency strength of the statement u 2 = ω 2, where u 2 is the second uniform indiscernible. Best known bounds: Con(there is a strong cardinal) Con(u 2 = ω 2 ) Con(there is a Woodin cardinal with a measurable above it) Remark: The difficulty is that we don t know how to use the hypothesis u 2 = ω 2 to build larger models, even if we were given a measurable to make sense of the core model K. Related Problem: Determine the consistency strength of the statement every real has a sharp + every subset of ω L(R) 1 in L(R) is constructible from a real. Problem 2. Assume PD. C 3 is the largest countable Π 1 3-set of reals. Is it true that C 3 = {x M 2 R x is 1 3 definable from a mastercode of M 2 }? C 1 = {x x is 1 1 equivalent to a mastercode of L} C 2 = R L The reals in C 3 are Turing cofinal in C 4 = M 2 R. Problem 3. Working in ZFC, how large can Θ L(R) be? ω V 1 < Θ L(R) Con(ω V 2 < Θ L(R) ) if e.g. u 2 = ω 2 But what about ω V 3 < Θ L(R)? Variant: Assume there are arbitrarily large Woodin cardinals. Is it possible that there is a universally Baire well-ordering of ordertype ω V 3? Problem 4. Assume AD + and assume that there is no iteration strategy for a countable mouse with a superstrong. Let a R OD. Does there exist a countable iterable mouse M such that a M? Remark: If there is an iteration strategy Σ for a countable mouse with a superstrong then we work in an initial segment of the Wadge hierarchy < W Σ. (Woodin) If we replace the hypothesis with no iteration strategy for a countable mouse satisfying the AD R hypothesis then the conclusion follows. This is the best result known. 1

Problem 5. Suppose M 1 (x) exists for all sets x. K will be closed under the operation x M 1 (x) and any model closed under this operation will be Σ1 3 correct. Is K Σ 1 4 correct under the hypotheses that M 1 (x) exists for all x and that there is no inner model with 2 Woodins? Remark: (Steel) Assume that K exists below a Woodin cardinal (e.g. ORD is measurable) and assume that there is a measurable and that there is no inner model with 1 Woodin. Then K is Σ 1 3 correct. Conjectured improvement to Steel s Theorem: Assume that x(x exists) and that there is no inner model with a Woodin. Is K Σ 1 3 correct? There are partial results in this direction (Woodin and others). Problem 6. Assume that x(m 1 (x) exists) and that there is a least Π1 3 singleton, z, that is not in the least inner model, N, closed under the operation x M 1 (x). Does N exist and is z 1 3 isomorphic to N? Remark: This would give Σ 1 4 correctness for K in the case that K doesn t go beyond N. The second clause in the above conclusion is an instance of problem 2. Problem 7. a) Let M be a countable, transitive structure that is elementarily embeddable into some V α. Is M (ω 1 + 1) iterable? b) (An instance of CBH) For every countable iteration tree on V of limit length such that every extender used is countably closed from the model from which it was taken, is there a cofinal well-founded branch? Note: Countably closed means that ω Ult(V, E) Ult(V, E). In any L[ E] model UBH is true. (Woodin) If you drop countable closure then CBH (i.e. full CBH) is false. Problem 8. Let L[ E] be an extender model such that every countable structure elementarily embeddable into a level of the model is (ω 1 + 1) iterable (so that many forms of condensation hold). Characterize (in terms of large cardinal axioms) all successor cardinals (κ + ) L[ E] of L[ E] such that L[ E] = (every stationary subset S κ + Cof(ω) reflects). Variant: Characterize all (κ + ) L[ E] such that L[ E] = (every stationary subset S κ + Cof(< κ) reflects). Problem 9. What is the consistency strength of λ for some singular λ? Best upper bound known: κ(κ is κ +ω strongly compact) Contrast this with the best upper bound known for ℵ ω : there is a measurable subcompact. 2

Problem 10. Let j : V M be elementary, assume ORD is measurable and assume there is no proper class inner model with a Woodin. Is j K an iteration map? (Schindler) This is true if ω M M. Problem 11. a) Rate the consistency strength of the following statement: Let I be a simply definable σ-ideal.then the statement Every Σ 1 2 (projective) I-positive set has a Borel I-positive subset holds in every generic extension. b) Assume 0 #. Is it possible to force over V a real x such that R V [G] L[x] is I-positive? Remark: Here definable means simple, i.e., countable sets, Lebegue null sets, meager sets, and etc. Problem 12. Prove that if V = W [r] for some real r, V and W have the same cofinalities, W = CH, and V = 2 ℵ0 = ℵ 2, then there is an inner model with ℵ 2 many measurables. (Shelah) Under the above hypothesis, there is an inner model with a measurable. Problem 13. Investigate the following ZFC-model: HOD V [G] where G is generic over V for Coll(ω, < ORD). In particular, Does CH hold in this model? Problem 14. Assume 0-Pistol doesn t exist. Suppose κ is Mahlo and κ (Sing) fails. a) Must κ be a measurable in K? b) Suppose, in addition, that GCH holds below κ. Is there an inner model with a strong cardinal? c) Can GCH hold? (Woodin) CON(o(κ) = κ ++ + ɛ) CON( κ is Mahlo and κ fails ). (Zeman) If κ is Mahlo and κ (Sing) fails then for all λ < κ there is δ < κ such that K = o(δ) > λ. 3

Problem 15. a) Assume there is no proper class inner model with a Woodin cardinal. Must there exist a set-iterable extender model which satisfies weak covering? b) Does CON( ZFC + NS ω1 is ℵ 2 -saturated ) imply CON(ZFC + there is a Woodin cardinal )? Problem 16. Let M be the minimal fully iterable extender model which satisfies there is a Woodin cardinal κ which is a limit of Woodin cardinals. Let D be the derived model of M bellow κ. Does D = θ is regular? Problem 17. Determine the consistency strength of incompatible models of AD + (i.e. there are A and B such that L(A, R) and L(B, R) satisfy AD + but L(A, B, R) = AD). (Neeman and Woodin) Upper Bound: Woodin limit of Woodin cardinals. (Woodin) Lower Bound: AD R + DC. Problem 18. Is HOD L(R) θ a normal iterate of M ω δ 0 where δ 0 is the least Woodin of M ω? If not, is there a normal iterate Q of HOD L(R) fixing θ such that Q θ is a normal iterate of every countable iterate of M ω δ 0? (Neeman) The answer to the first question is almost no. Problem 19. Assume V = L(R) + AD. Let Γ be a Π 1 1-like scaled pointclass (i.e., closed under R and non-self-dual). Let δ = sup{ < :< is a pwo in = Γ Γ }. Then, is Γ closed under unions of length < δ? (Kechris-Martin) Known for Π 1 3. (Jackson) Known for Π 1 2n+5. 4

Problem 20. Is there an inner model M of L[0 # ] such that 0 # M, 0 # M[G], and (M[G], G) = ZFC, where G is P-generic over M for some M-definable class-forcing? 5